ArticleFrontiers in physiology2021
Anaerobic Capacity in Running: The Effect of Computational Method.
Article in Frontiers in physiology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Evaluation of methods to quantify aerobic-anaerobic energy contributions during sports and exercise - a systematic review and best-evidence synthesis.Frontiers in sports and active living · 2025Pooled it
- Runners Employ Different Strategies to Cope With Increased Speeds Based on Their Initial Strike Patterns.Frontiers in physiology · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionTo date, no study has compared anaerobic capacity (AnC) estimates computed with the maximal accumulated oxygen deficit (MAOD) method and the gross energy cost (GEC) method applied to treadmill running exercise. PURPOSE: Four different models for estimating anaerobic energy supply during treadmill running exercise were compared.
methodsFifteen endurance-trained recreational athletes performed, after a 10-min warm-up, five 4-min stages at ∼55-80% of peak oxygen uptake, and a 4-min time trial (TT). Two linear speed-metabolic rate (MR) regression models were used to estimate the instantaneous required MR during the TT (MR
resultsThe GEC remained constant at ∼4.39 ± 0.29 J⋅kg
conclusionThese findings demonstrate a generally high disagreement in estimated anaerobic capacities between models and show that the inclusion of a measured Y-intercept in the linear regression (i.e., 5+Y
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.